ReviewCancers2023
Short-Term Outcomes after D2 Gastrectomy with Complete Mesogastric Excision in Patients with Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of High-Quality Studies.
Review in Cancers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Complete mesogastric excision (CME) has been advocated to allow for a more extensive retrieval of lymph nodes, as well as lowering loco-regional recurrence rates. This study aims to analyze the short-term outcomes of D2 radical gastrectomy with CME compared to standard D2 gastrectomy. A systematic review of the literature was conducted according to the Cochrane recommendations until 2 July 2023 (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023443361). The primary outcome, expressed as mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), was the number of harvested lymph nodes (LNs). Meta-analyses of means and binary outcomes were developed using random effects models to assess heterogeneity. The risk of bias in included studies was assessed with the RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tools. There were 13 studies involving 2009 patients that were included, revealing a significantly higher mean number of harvested LNs in the CME group (MD: 2.55; 95% CI: 0.25-4.86; 95%;
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.